« Guns, Gays, And Uh, Phill Kline | Main | More Thompsonian Economics »

April 14, 2007

Will Fred Thompson Withdraw The Troops?

By Ezra

If you've any doubt of the type of campaign Fred Thompson wants to run, open the Wall Street Journal this morning and read the Law & Order actor's op-ed "Case Closed: Tax cuts mean growth."

Despite the atmospherics, he's not pretending to be an economist here (and a good thing, too). He's pretending to be Reagan. The article starts off with the folksy, funny opener, "It's that time again, and I was thinking of the old joke about paying your taxes with a smile. The punch line is that the IRS doesn't accept smiles. They want your money." Thompson, it turns out, doesn't want to give it to them. Better yet, he's prepared to explain why they shouldn't get it.

"Treasury statistics show that tax revenues have soared and the budget deficit has been shrinking faster than even the optimists projected," writes Thompson, or one of his aides. "Since the first tax cuts were passed, when I was in the Senate, the budget deficit has been cut in half...at this rate, the budget will be in surplus by 2010."

None of that, of course, is true. The budget deficit created by the tax cuts has eased, but you need only glance at this graph of the deficit to see the Republican record on red ink. See that plummeting line? That's when Thompson was in the Senate. And the administration's budget projections that Thompson is using assume that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars will, come 2010, cost zero dollars, Medicare and Medicaid will endure $100 billion in cuts, SCHIP won't be fully funded, and the AMT will be preserved. That made sense for the Bush administration to say, of course, because all those decisions would be made when they were out of office. But all of those decisions will have to be made when Thompson is hoping to be in office. And so some enterprising political reporter should ask him about this article. The questions, in order, should be:

1. Do you mean to suggest you will withdraw all troops, civil servants, government-funded contractors, and other cost-drivers from Iraq and Afghanistan by 2010?
2. Are you going to cut Medicare and Medicaid by $100 billion over the next five years and, if so, where will you make your cuts?
3. Do you think the Children's Health Insurance Program should be fully funded?
4. Are you willing to preserve the AMT in its current form and on its current schedule?

The answers, I think, will be rather illuminating.

April 14, 2007 | Permalink

Comments

Do you really expect reasonable, straight answers?

Posted by: Ed in Socal | Apr 14, 2007 4:27:17 PM

The politics of the AMT are pretty interesting, actually. If you fall into AMT-land (as I have been blessed to do the last couple of years), you know that the AMT obliterates deductions for state and local taxes. Those of us who live in high tax states -- I live in The Garden State -- get more hammered on the AMT than people who live in low tax states. Virtually all of the high tax states are Democratic strongholds. So the AMT falls particularly on upper middle class types who live in Democratic states. It is, derivatively and implicitly, a wealth transfer from those people to people who do not pay the AMT, including -- at the margin -- people with identical incomes who live in low tax states. If these facts were widely understood, the Republicans would not support reform of the AMT (excepting, obviously, Republicans imprisoned within high tax states such as California and New Jersey).

Actually, the problem with the AMT is not inherent, but in its interaction with the Federal Income Tax. There is a good argument that we should simply repeal the Federal Income Tax and apply the AMT to everybody (with some tweaks I'm not expert enough to understand). The problem, of course, is that the Federal Income Tax is complex because complexity serves the interests of the Congress and interest groups who are skilled at manipulating Congress.

Posted by: TigerHawk | Apr 14, 2007 4:38:51 PM

Do you really expect reasonable, straight answers?

Of course not. But there's utility in making him dance. The more often he has to fumble and lie his way through simple policy questions, the easier it becomes to demonstrate to voters and opinion shapers that Thompson is unacceptable.

Posted by: NBarnes | Apr 14, 2007 4:55:52 PM

The most ridiculous aspect of Thompson's argument is that the budget was running a great surplus when the Bush tax cuts were passed. So Thompson is saying that, if he's permitted to make all the fallacious assumptions that Ezra pointed out, maybe by 2010 our budget will be back to where it was in 2000, except, of course, that the incredible deficits we ran up in the meantime greatly weakened our nation's financial and strategic (Chinese-government owned debt) position. Quite an achievement to boast about!

Posted by: Civil-rights lawyer | Apr 14, 2007 5:08:02 PM

The most ridiculous aspect of Thompson's argument is that the budget was running a great surplus when the Bush tax cuts were passed.

The rediculous aspect of your post is confusing revenues with budgets.

I doubt that I am bright enough to explain the difference to yu.

Posted by: Anonymouse | Apr 14, 2007 6:12:35 PM

Fred Dalton Thompson, as a fully-scripted TV DA, hasn't had to live with independent thinking for some time, so hauling out the brave but untrue words from another age is to be expected. And Americans have proven that they like the word 'cuts' in regard to their taxes, even if for most the cuts were minimal.

When he was a senator, he acted like the prototype GOP bloviator, and now as an actor he acts like the prototype law 'n order conservative. He acts his script real well too (and doesn't need the prompt-cards that Ronnie R relied upon).

IMO, he's a lot harder target for the Dems than Rudy or McCain, so his party fortunes may rise to the top and save the day for a party that seems to not know where it wants to go. Fred signals that the direction is backward to the 'America is a shining city on a hill' days when up was down and down was up. And hey, he's an 'actual' DA that hasn't lived with gays or done drag.

Lack of political name recognition is just a matter of some moolah, and the DC pundits will luv him to success. My take is that he'd beat any of the three Dem. candidates if he can somehow cast overboard the disasters of the GWB years without actually saying that. His harkening back to the RayGun days is one way to pull off that magic - and his absence from DC politics for most the Bush II era helps that along. He needs a Gorbachev to tell to take down the wall though.

Posted by: JimPortlandOR | Apr 14, 2007 6:13:43 PM

Fred Dalton Thompson, as a fully-scripted TV DA, hasn't had to live with independent thinking for some time, so hauling out the brave but untrue words from another age is to be expected. And Americans have proven that they like the word 'cuts' in regard to their taxes, even if for most the cuts were minimal.

When he was a senator, he acted like the prototype GOP bloviator, and now as an actor he acts like the prototype law 'n order conservative. He acts his script real well too (and doesn't need the prompt-cards that Ronnie R relied upon).

IMO, he's a lot harder target for the Dems than Rudy or McCain, so his party fortunes may rise to the top and save the day for a party that seems to not know where it wants to go. Fred signals that the direction is backward to the 'America is a shining city on a hill' days when up was down and down was up. And hey, he's an 'actual' DA that hasn't lived with gays or done drag.

Lack of political name recognition is just a matter of some moolah, and the DC pundits will luv him to success. My take is that he'd beat any of the three Dem. candidates if he can somehow cast overboard the disasters of the GWB years without actually saying that. His harkening back to the RayGun days is one way to pull off that magic - and his absence from DC politics for most the Bush II era helps that along. He needs a Gorbachev to tell to take down the wall though.

Posted by: JimPortlandOR | Apr 14, 2007 6:14:53 PM

Dear Anonymouse,

Please take your time and pull your thoughts together. Don't worry -- I'll wait for you.

Posted by: Civil-rights lawyer | Apr 14, 2007 6:35:15 PM

Ezra are those inflation adjusted dollars on the graph to which you linked? They don't look like it.

Posted by: Castorp | Apr 14, 2007 9:28:12 PM

You guys should take this routine on the road.
The graph Ezra provides shows a freefall from Clintoon's reign proving 'false bubble' taxation is completely wrong-headed and on a level of denial just short of mental retardation....and anyone who pretends to believe in it.

Then you have the audacity to suggest the notable gain is somehow not enough for you and blame Bush and his tax cuts for it....Do your blinders come with a donkey emblem embossed on the side or do you simply wear it on your forehead as if branded for identification of a lobotomy half completed?

Posted by: Winghunter | Apr 14, 2007 10:12:48 PM

Winghunter,

That's funny. You insult everyone's intelligence, but your website is "Draft Fred Thompson," as if he could actually be a credible candidate.

Posted by: Stephen | Apr 14, 2007 10:51:10 PM

"Clintoon"?

What are you, five?

Posted by: CaseyL | Apr 14, 2007 11:16:02 PM

Can't insult what you don't have, whether it's intentional or not.


Casey,
Only people who voted for him refuse to grow up hence, Clintoon.

Pick a place here and now to meet in DC, March of '08...Your choice.


Posted by: Winghunter | Apr 14, 2007 11:33:23 PM

Winghunter, are you trying to pick a fight? Is that really what you're doing?

I'm impressed that a 7th-grader would be so interested in politics, but grownups aren't going to take you seriously if you try to pick fights.

Rather than spend your time reading partisan weblogs, you might just want to study hard in civics class, maybe read some books your teachers recommend, and when you're older you can talk to adults about this stuff.

Posted by: Stephen | Apr 15, 2007 11:12:13 AM

Stephen sounds like a good match for Casey L. Sure you two will hook up somehow and complete that lobotomy that was evidently horribly botched.

Posted by: daveinboca | Apr 15, 2007 12:41:51 PM

Fred Thompson is a joke. This Reagan era crap is rediculous. Anyone remember when Reagan sold weapons to both Iraq and Iran for drugs? Or how poverty stricken the middle class became? Or Nancys Just say no? Or His Vice president? Anyone who supports Reagan still in this day and age is beyond help.

Posted by: old hack | Apr 15, 2007 8:26:55 PM

Every time someone brings up the ridiculous assertion that tax cuts increase revenues to the Treasury, the best response is to send that person to the government's own website for the historical data. On that website they'll notice one rather stark fact:

Tax revenues declined for the first three years of Bush's regime. As in, declined. They did not surpass Clinton's last year until 2005.

Whenever supply-siders talk about Bush, they conveniently leave out those first three years and act as if his "presidency" started in 2004.

Beyond that, no reputable economist believes that tax cuts ever pay for themselves. Even Bush's own people said that they typically bring back less than 20 cents on the dollar.

Tax cuts reduce revenues to the Treasury. That's why supply-siders always, always set records for largest deficits. If they had the magical impact their adherents claim, we'd see surpluses, not massive deficits. And that's by definition.

Posted by: Cuchulain | Apr 15, 2007 10:37:50 PM

Like Fred, I shoot very straight BUT, I do not insult until provoked as each and every single one of you has already done, such
as,"None of that, of course, is true.","See that plummeting line? That's when Thompson was in the Senate.", "The budget deficit created by the tax cuts has eased", "Do you really expect reasonable, straight answers?", "Of course not. But there's utility in making him dance. The more often he has to fumble and lie his way through simple policy questions, the easier it becomes to demonstrate to voters and opinion shapers that Thompson is unacceptable.","So Thompson is saying that, if he's permitted to make all the fallacious assumptions that Ezra pointed out...", "Quite an achievement to boast about!", "hasn't had to live with independent thinking for some time, so hauling out the brave but untrue words from another age is to be expected."

IF NOT an outright insult the rest is disingenuous at best and misleading therefore, it is you 'picking a fight'. I merely picked up the gauntlet.

Also, to meet, meathead, in March of '08 would be an announcement of backbone by the loser...How I thought for one second you would have figured that out on your own was a mistake on my part in gauging your ability to process a real thought.

DO NOT insult and then not expect to be personally responsible for your own actions with an equal and rightful retaliation...I know people like you have completely replaced PR for PC but, one or two of you are bound to mature some year....Maybe.

Now, when I receive the proof that I've requested you can perform your little denial dance routines but, it will be the truth nonetheless.


Posted by: Winghunter | Apr 15, 2007 11:18:07 PM

He is the only one from either party that I would take a trip to the polls for in 2008. I think the rest of them stink. He just stinks less...so far.

Posted by: stacie | Apr 16, 2007 1:12:06 AM

I'm not sure I can remember when I last heard a Republican honestly discuss budget matters. Most politicians are bad enough, but those supply-siders and Bush cheerleaders...

Posted by: Batocchio | Apr 16, 2007 3:15:11 AM

Thompson is a joke. Even if he were somehow to survive the savage ridicule mccain, rudy & crew will pile on him and win the primary, he has very little credibility as an executive. You know what happens when you tell people who don't live in blogistan that the 'DA from Law and Order has a presidential campaign'? They call bullshit.

The only reason George the Lesser even squeaked close enough to seize the presidency was a massively compliant media.

Some random asshole like Thompson doesnt stand a chance if he doesnt at least run for Governor first or something.

Posted by: Sandals | Apr 16, 2007 4:07:48 AM

"Some random asshole like Thompson doesnt stand a chance if he doesnt at least run for Governor first or something."

OH? Like Obama or Hillary or Edwards?

Posted by: Ordinary Coloradan | Apr 16, 2007 8:08:32 AM

The supply-siders have it wrong. Reagan was no good for the U.S.

To adapt James Carville's legendary quote, "It's the inflation, stupid."

The dollar today is worth less than 5 cents in 1913 money. Any guesses as to why? Inflation.

Contrary to what you've been told, inflation isn't higher prices. It's an increased supply of dollars chasing goods on the market. Fewer dollars mean less inflation, more dollars means more. It's basic economics.

What we see today with the housing bubble is a direct result of M3 numbers being shielded. When the housing market crashes (and it will, just like the tech-stocks did in the 90's), the government (through the Federal Reserve) will continue to buoy the value of the stock market by pumping more (inflated) dollars into the market, thus providing the illusion that the markets are maintaining (and possibly even gaining) while prices rise steadily and the middle and lower classes get poorer.

Fred Thompson won't manage this. He's a Reagan Republican, whoopee! That means he'll cut taxes, increase Federal Reserve output and continue to increase spending in the now-debunked tradition of Keynesian and Chicago economics.

There is a candidate who wants to stop this endless and ridiculous cycle of debasing American currency (it isn't Fred, Hillary, Wilma, Rudy, or Obama). Look him up.

--M

Posted by: Michael Hargett | Jun 12, 2007 10:27:52 PM

Um, last time I checked the budget deficit was NOT caused by tax cuts. You just made that up. After the .com bust and all the other insane business ventures that went down the tubes with it and after several years of war AND massive spending the deficit is actually coming down. There is MORE MONEY COMING IN but even MORE going out!!
Stop the insane pork, entitlemant insanity and get the war effort under control and you will see a surplus without raising taxes.
You pinko commie!!

Posted by: ebritt | Aug 14, 2007 3:49:58 PM

liqingchao 07年08月30日
google排名
google排名
wow gold
wow gold
powerleveling
powerleveling
wow gold
wow gold
powerleveling
powerleveling
power leveling
power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power level
wow power level
world of warcraft powerleveling
world of warcraft powerleveling
world of warcraft power leveling
world of warcraft power leveling
Crm
Crm
呼叫中心
呼叫中心
客户关系管理
客户关系管理
北京月嫂
北京月嫂
china tour
china tour
hongkong hotel
hongkong hotel
beijing tour
beijing tour

北京律师
北京律师
礼品
礼品
礼品公司
礼品公司
会议礼品
会议礼品
商务礼品
商务礼品
保洁
保洁
保洁公司
保洁公司
翻译公司
翻译公司
上海翻译公司
上海翻译公司
北京翻译公司
北京翻译公司
北京搬家公司
北京搬家公司
鼓风机
风机
风机
货架
光盘刻录
光盘刻录
光盘制作
光盘制作
光盘印刷
光盘印刷
红外测温仪
红外测温仪
超声波测厚仪
超声波测厚仪

超声波探伤仪
超声波探伤仪
频闪仪
频闪仪
涂层测厚仪
涂层测厚仪
电火花检测仪
电火花检测仪
google排名
集团电话
集团电话
网站设计
网站设计
多媒体
监控
监控
搬家公司
搬家公司
条码打印机
条码打印机

Posted by: wslmwps | Aug 30, 2007 1:15:28 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.